| Author |
Message |
    
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 3168
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 6:20 pm: | 
|
Was Gannon any different than Hunter S. Thompson's "gonzo journalism"? Or Helen Thomas' brand of same? |
Strawman
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4566
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 7:10 pm: |
|
Joe actually just blamed Rumsfeld for the Kurds being gassed...Holy ignorance. This qualifies as the dumbest thing ever said on MOL.
Take a bow Joe, you earned it.  |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4355
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 7:21 pm: |
|
"Was Gannon any different than Hunter S. Thompson's "gonzo journalism"?"
Well, let's see. Guckert/Gannon reprinted press releases. I don't think anybody wrote what Thompson did, before he wrote it. Or anything remotely like it, for that matter. If the right wing "spin machine" is actually pushing that comparison, they'd better go back to the drawing board.
And Joe's statements were correct, it's just an "uncomfortable" fact for some that the gassing of the Kurds didn't bother Donnie before.
As for whether Guckert/Gannon is a big deal: When Dick Morris was Clinton's consultant, it was big news when he was caught playing footsie with a hooker. Now, the whole White House has been caught "playing footsie" with a hooker. What goes around comes around, kids. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 3170
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 7:53 pm: |
|
Well, gee, Nohero. That's an interesting statement that Gannon just reprinted press releases. I'm wondering if he took the anti-illegal immigration stance in his questioning that Terry Moran seems to allude to ("But he also challenged the White House from time to time with pointed questions—from the right. And that always struck me as valuable and necessary.") and then just reprinted press releases. Do you know Gannon did that all the time?
And as I read in the Star Ledger, Thompson wasn't into objective journalism, and really felt confined by the facts. He thought it was better to insert things that had no factual basis to get to the 'truth.' So did Dan Rather.
And as far as printing press releases, there were 100K brand new cops in the 90s. I read the press releases...er...the news reports that told me so.
|
Strawman
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4567
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 8:13 pm: |
|
Nohero,
It's been sad watching your fall from reality. Saddam sits in a prison cell and other then Bush, It's Rummy he can thank for that..
libs, useless, foolish and simply out of touch. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 476
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 8:40 pm: |
|
I think we all need to admit that Bush deserves absolute credit for toppling Saddam Hussein and for pushing for the first election in Iraq since before Hussein came to power--- no question at all.
In an attempt to be fair and balanced, we must weigh that part of the equation against the "new" Iraq--- by all accounts also the principal training ground and fly paper for would-be Islamic militants, terrorists, and fanatics.
If the Iraq initiative of the Bush administration results in either no or limited terrorist attacks on the US in the next five years, we'll have to take our hats off to Bush 43. If, on the other hand, we get hit again and viciously so, then this is all for nothing.
By the way, I have spent several years of my life in areas where a terrorist bomb could go off in a pub or "department store" at any time, in any place, and it's not something you want have here on US soil. |
Joe
Citizen
Username: Gonets
Post Number: 710
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 8:50 pm: |
|
Classic distortion from you Straw.
The fact is that Rumsfeld was aware that Saddam gassed the Kurds yet still advised Reagan to go ahead and provide arms and money to Saddam.
You're too indolent, ignorant or disingenuous to acknowledge Rumsfeld's culpability in feeding this monster. No surprise.
Unfortunately for you there's a copious amount of information to prove it. Butlike all demagogues soundbites are more important than facts.
 |
Strawman
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4568
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 9:22 pm: |
|
Saddam should have shot Rummy on the spot. Little did Hussein know he was speaking to his worst enemy. The man who would destroy him..
poor Joe. |
Joe
Citizen
Username: Gonets
Post Number: 711
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 21, 2005 - 10:10 pm: |
|
oh. I get it. Rummy supplied him with weapons and money to destroy him. Really Saddam would have never survived to be a problem if luminaries like Rummy weren't there to be his lifeline.
Keep talking. You make yourself look more ridiculous with each post. I didn't think that was possible, but you push the limits of self-parody. |
Strawman
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4569
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 9:18 am: |
|
Poor Joe. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 898
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 9:49 am: |
|
Bush on Chirac yesterday: "I'm looking for a good cowboy."
Is this Bush acknowledging his loss of Jeff Gannon? |
Strawman
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4570
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 10:41 am: |
|
no, he was saying he has no intention of inviting Chirac to his ranch. This after a French reporter asked him if he intended to.
You people really are going to have to stay on top of these issues. I can't spoon feed you everything.
|
jonnyt
Citizen
Username: Jonnyt
Post Number: 160
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 11:40 am: |
|
You red-blooded Americans must have choked on you "freedom" fries watching the cowboy in chief kissing up to Chirac yesterday:
"This is my first dinner since I've been re-elected on European soil, and it's with Jacques Chirac -- and that ought to say something," Bush said.
"Every time I meet with Jacques, he's got good advice," Mr. Bush told reporters during a photo opportunity.
After the lobster risotto with truffle sauce and alongside the filet of beef with bordelaise sauce was a side dish of potatoes. Mr. Bush announced that they were "French fries," one participant said. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 478
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 1:12 pm: |
|
Should be a good serving of crow in there for somebody... |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 479
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 1:13 pm: |
|
Should have said "corbeau a la mode de Caen" |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1595
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 1:32 pm: |
|
Yeah, and good ole' Jack was the one eating it... the crow that is. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 902
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 4:46 pm: |
|
Turns out Guckert kept a journal from day one and Editor and Publisher has him quoted that he wants to turn it into a book.
Not only is this story not going away, it keeps getting deeper. Stay tuned for what's in that journal...
|
Maple Man
Citizen
Username: Mapleman
Post Number: 489
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 4:52 pm: |
|
At this point, it's hardly news that the Bush Administration has been using any means at their disposal to disinform the public.
Why does anyone think our citizens will give a damn about the Gannon story when they haven't shown any inclination to care the slightest bit about the administration's four-year constant stream of lies and misdirection? |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 903
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 4:56 pm: |
|
MM: The answer to your question lies in that E&P story. Gannon compared himself (favorably!) to Monica Lewinsky. Given the collective intelligence level of the American population, it would take a scandal, and a character, of Gannon/Lewinsky proportions to bring down this president. Could be... |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 732
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 5:06 pm: |
|
RL, Only if Gannon\Guckert and Bush had sex (or whatever you want to call it), which, while amusing to consider, is about as likely property taxes dropping significantly in SOMa. |
Maple Man
Citizen
Username: Mapleman
Post Number: 491
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 5:22 pm: |
|
If the citizens of this country gave a hoot about Bush and his administration's manipulation of the truth, his ••• would have been booted out of office in November. Clearly, Americans couldn't possibly care less about whether they're misled by their president. A good proportion even believe it's pretty shrewd of him to try to get this Gannon thing over on us. They also don't care if he needs to shade the truth (or completely obliterate it, for that matter) to advance his agenda.
Caveat emptor. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 482
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 5:56 pm: |
|
The reason that many people barely pay attention to the Guckert "affair" is that they are so imbued with the self-righteous right-wing ideology of the day that they are voluntarily blind to any news that is contrary to their ideology.
Faced with a choice of trying to disprove factual information or clinging to their beliefs, they will always get busy working on the "proof." |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 560
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 9:00 am: |
|
For all those that were outraged that Jeff Gannon asked softball questions and thus may have been a Rove plant, here is a game in which Clinton used five pitchers in one press conference.
These are excerpts from Clinton's first press conference in over year because of Lewinsky.
Gannon #1, Wolf Blitzer of CNN: "Mr. President, there's been a lot of people in New York state who've spoken with your wife, who seem to be pretty much convinced she wants to run for the Senate seat next year. A, how do you feel about that? Do you think she would be a good senator? And as part of a broader question involving what has happened over the past year, how are the two of you doing in trying to strengthen your relationship, given everything you and she have been through over this past year?"
Gannon #2, batty Sarah McClendon, once the classic poster girl for the loose credentialing process at the White House. Reporters laughed when Clinton went beyond the front row to pick her as she yelled to get his attention. Standing to show her snappy navy-blue beret, McClendon asked: "Sir, will you tell us why you think the people have been so mean to you? Is it a conspiracy? Is it a plan to treat you worse than they treated Abe Lincoln?" That allowed Clinton to make jokes. I don't remember the Columbia Journalism Review huffing that she "had to go" and her hard pass should be revoked.
Gannon #3, John F. (for Fawning?) Harris of the Washington Post: "Sir, George Stephanopoulos has written a book that contain — contains some tough and fairly personal criticism of you. Earlier, Dick Morris had written a somewhat similar book. How much pain do these judgments by former aides cause you? And do you consider it a betrayal for people to write books on the history of your administration while you're still in office?" See how these reporters feel Clinton's pain? Tightening the press credentials won't solve the problem of long-established media outlets acting like tender psychoanalysts for liberal presidents.
Gannon #4, Kenneth Walsh of U.S. News & World Report, who followed up on Clinton's feelings and reflections on his pain: "I understand that you don't want to speculate about what your opponents might do now, after the impeachment struggle is over, but I wonder what your feelings are, after some period of reflection, on the impeachment process, the — how you were treated and if you feel resentment, relief, and how you think people will deal with this and see it 10 or 20 years from now?" To Walsh, the only question was about Clinton's opponents and whether the president resented them. He couldn't even ask whether Clinton considered his presidency or his legacy irreparably damaged by the impeachment.
Gannon #5 was National Public Radio's Mara Liasson: "Mr. President, your vice president has recently been ridiculed for claiming that he invented the Internet and spent his boyhood plowing steep hillsides in Tennessee. I'm wondering what you think of those claims and what advice you'd give him about how to brag on himself without getting in so much trouble." This allowed Clinton to say with a smile: "Well, you know, he came a lot closer to inventing the Internet than I did." He then went into an extended defense of Al Gore's genuineness
All of the above have probably never worked for an escort service and except for McClendon have better credentials that Gannon. However , all five are come across just as biased.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/graham200502160746.asp
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4366
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:35 am: |
|
"However , all five are come across just as biased."
That's just naked spin on the part of the author of that article. Maybe Question #2 is almost Gannon-like, but it falls short of actually making stuff up, or of the type of questions from Gannon which have been documented. They weren't just "softballs", they were actualy diversions from substative questioning.
Sorry for using the term "naked spin" in a discussion of Mr. "American Gigolo" Gannon/Guckert. |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 562
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:49 am: |
|
Too bad we don't have any naked pictures of Helen Thomas, since she is definately not biased.
Helen Thomas: "My follow-up is, why does (George Bush) want to drop bombs on innocent Iraqis?" -- January 6, 2003
---
Helen Thomas: "Is this (war) revenge, 11 years of revenge?" -- January 6, 2003
---
Helen Thomas to Fleischer: "[W]hy is [Bush] going to bomb them? I mean, how do you bomb people back to democracy? This is a question of conquest. They didn't ask to be "liberated" by the United States. This is our self-imposed political solution for them." — Feb. 26, 2003. As reported by Salon
---
Helen Thomas: "We didn't go in to win the war on terrorism when we invaded Iraq." -- April 29, 2004. As reported by Unknown News
---
Helen Thomas: "...following up Ann Compton's question [regarding Saddam Hussein's court hearing], does [President Bush] agree with Saddam that Presidents are above the law?" -- July 1, 2004. As reported by Unknown News.
---
Helen Thomas: "Prime Minister Blair took full personal responsibility for taking his nation into war under falsehoods -- under reasons that have been determined now to be false. Is President Bush also willing to take full, personal responsibility --"
A: "I think Prime Minister Blair said that it was the right thing to do; that Saddam Hussein's regime was a threat."
Helen Thomas: "Those were not the reasons he took his country into war. It turned out to be untrue, and the same is true for us. Does the President take full, personal responsibility for this war?"
A: "The issue here is what do you to with a threat in a post-September 11th world? Either you live with a threat, or you confront the threat."
Helen Thomas: "There was no threat."
A: "The President made the decision to confront the threat."
Helen Thomas: "Saddam Hussein did not threaten this country." -- July 19, 2004. As reported by Unknown News.
---
Helen Thomas: "Why are we killing people in Iraq? There are many men, women and children being killed there. I mean, what is the reason we are there, killing people, continuing. It's outrageous." -- Nov. 29, 2004. As reported by Unknown News
---
Helen Thomas: "Has the President given any orders to stop the ongoing brutalization of Iraqi prisoners?" -- Dec. 8, 2004. As reported by Unknown News
---
|
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7722
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:50 am: |
|
In a column last week Maureen Dowd indicated it took her about six months to gain a security clearance to be allowed in the White House press room. Apparently Mr. "Gannon" had no such trouble obtaining the clearance, in spite of some questionable incidents in his background. This to me is the main part of the scandal. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 913
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 10:52 am: |
|
The difference is that none of these reporters were placed there by Clinton himself. (And he chose Sarah, knowing Bubba, because she was cute.) Right wing nutterbalonies once again missing the point. It wasn't just that Gannon was tossing softballs. And it wasn't that he was a male protitute (though that does increase the irony and humor of the situation ten-fold). It's that he was specifically placed there by Bush's team, without ANY journalistic credibility, to take pressure off a president and a press security who cannot reasonably justify their insane policies to ordinary and rational free-thinking people.
This Gannon guy is a real wild card.
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4368
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 11:04 am: |
|
Is it the fact that Helen Thomas asks tough questions, or that you don't have naked pictures of her, that bothers you more? |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 563
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 11:05 am: |
|
Ah, Nohero, one man's toughness is another man's bias. What bothers me the most is the mental picture of a naked Helen Thomas. That is why Bush moved her to the back of the room.
There is no proof that Gannon was a placed there by Bush's team. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 915
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 11:07 am: |
|
"There is no proof that Gannon was a placed there by Bush's team."
Not yet. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 5646
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 2:18 pm: |
|
In my view, a journalist's job is to challenge the government. Helen Thomas is biased against the current government. There was plenty of press biased against Clinton's government, too. That's as it should be.
And perhaps this is why so many journalists seem liberal. Because they are questioning the status quo. As I said, I believe that's their job.
Anyway, whether Helen Thomas is a good journalist or not, I think it's really beside the point of whether Bush's team planted Gannon. Very much beside the point. |
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 290
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 25, 2005 - 4:40 pm: |
|
According to reliable sources, it was the Texas Rangers who put Guckert in the White House, a move which apparently did not go down too well with the Texas Rovers. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page